Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
actually pretty sure they didn't ... Hans Blik (sp?) final report stated he suspected that Iraq wasn't being honest with their inspectors and that he believed there was an issue.
|
Actualy, 100% sure they did. The Blix report states as much.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/01/27/spr...anscript.blix/
As to speaking to honesty and cooperation, Blix's report stated, "It would appear from our experience so far that Iraq has decided in principle to provide cooperation on process, notably access."
He continues, "The most important point to make is that access has been provided to all sites we have wanted to inspect. And with one exception, it has been [without] problems."
He noted these problems, "While we now have the technical capability to send a U-2 plane placed at our disposal for aerial imagery and for surveillance during inspections and have informed Iraq that we plan to do so, Iraq has refused to guarantee its safety unless a number of conditions are fulfilled.
As these conditions went beyond what is stipulated in Resolution 1441 and what was practiced by UNSCOM and Iraq in the past, we note that Iraq is not so far complying with our requests. I hope this attitude will change.
Another air operation problem, which was so during our recent talks in Baghdad, concerned the use of helicopters flying into the no-fly zones. Iraq had insisted on sending helicopters of their own to accompany ours."
He closes his report by saying, "Mr. President, we now have an inspection apparatus that permits us to send multiple inspections teams every day all over Iraq by road or by air. Let me end by simply noting that that capability, which has been built up in a short time and which is now operating, is at the disposal of the Security Council."
It is a published agenda.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
http://newamericancentury.org/Rebuil...asDefenses.pdf
Quote:
|
you toss that out there like he's published a manifesto. He hasn't. You can believe this is all a master plan and an agenda if you want, I certainly can't "prove" there isn't or wasn't one any more than you can prove there was.
|
Seems pretty proveable as they were stupid enough to publish their goals and how they would execute them.
Quote:
|
As much as anti-Bush people refuse to see it ... could be as simple as reported. Tenet and the CIA reported a pro invasion package that Bush and the house saw and decided to go ahead. It matched the Russian and British intelligence and it was good enough to go in. It was a bi-partisan agreement at the time, something that even Hillary Clinton has refused to back down from.
|
I know its something really hard for you Bushies to come to grips with, but the Bush admin fudged the evidence and showed what THEY wanted to, to congress. There has been more than enough people to step forward to say the intelligence was not what the CIA had and that what was presented was cobled together to fit the administration agenda.
http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20...err_report.pdf
Quote:
|
conspiracy theories and agendas and Neo-Con world ruling plots are great for movies, but may not play out the real world.
|
Bad news Bingo, its not a theory anymore. It's fact and there is enough evidence to impeach Bush. It's sad to see some really intelligent people bury their heads in the sands and believe the administration is clean. But when these people are inundated by the crap that FauxNews (nee The White House) pumps out, and willingly swallow, I guess its expected.